PGT: President-Elect Donald J Trump

[ResAlien]

The old "if you ignore it it goes away" gambit. It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it works for them.

[photon]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Photon: he is deporting illegals. The fearmongering part comes in that there are Muslim and Hispanic AMERICAN CITIZENS who are scared for their lives.

Where did the Clinton campaign (or even the media independent of the campaign) say that Trump said he would deport American citizens?

To me fearmongering involves misrepresntation in some way, either by misstating what the other person is saying (like Trump did with Clinton's stance on guns and, well everything) or over/understating the significance of something.

[metallicat]

Or, you just don't require the ID for voting. You do realize that that policy is desired by certain groups specifically to limit their abilities to vote, right? It is a completely and totally racist policy. Just like gerrymandering. Like someone else said, why do we need to create solutions for problems that don't exist?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

Or, you just don't require the ID for voting. You do realize that that policy is desired by certain groups specifically to limit their abilities to vote, right? It is a completely and totally racist policy. Just like gerrymandering. Like someone else said, why do we need to create solutions for problems that don't exist?

Yes of course. But the law has been passed, it's awful but what are you going to do? Whine?

Let the politicians fight that law at the government level. Meanwhile on the ground, turn the negative into a positive. Our community will ban together, we'll get IDs, we'll better our lives and we'll vote against you and your racist policies.

[photon]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

my ID example. Let's say of the people who don't have ID, 70% of them happen to be black. You get IDs for 100% then the black problem is solved without identifying it. If you identify it, you solve the 70% and the other 30% are pissed.

This does not follow. Identifying how a problem impacts different segments of society doesn't require the solution to be skewed or limited to a particular segment of society. And in many cases you HAVE to identify those segments because the laws often require that a change cannot inequitably impact a segment of society.

And if you don't identify how a segment of society is impacted by something, then you have no way of knowing if something does or doesn't have an inequitable impact.

And it's that ignorance of impact that facilitates those that DO have an idea and want to make an inequitable impact to do so. That's exactly what the voter registration law changes are; They're making a change that appears equitable and applies to everyone in the name of fairness to prevent fraud but only if you dig into the details, identify the segments of society involved and how they're impacted, do you find out that the change is (often purposefully) in fact impacting poor people far more than others.

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Just make good policy for everyone and if it indirectly helps minorities, great!

Well sure, but I think that oversimplifies things. We're talking about low level changes to complex interconnected systems where there's rarely a change that only results in wins from every possible viewpoint. There's always an upside and a downside.

And again, the only way to know if there's a downside is to identify and measure the outcomes.

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

i disagree. you can fix race issues without identifying them.

Race issues aren't intended to be fixed. They're there for a reason - to keep the little people fighting amongst themselves so the people on Donald Trump's level can make off with all the money unnoticed.

George Carlin was right about an awful lot of stuff.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Dogbert

Race issues aren't intended to be fixed. They're there for a reason - to keep the little people fighting amongst themselves so the people on Donald Trump's level can make off with all the money unnoticed.

George Carlin was right about an awful lot of stuff.

that's true but how does it change. The little people have to chip away.
The good rich people have to help (and not just by throwing money at it)

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by photon

Where did the Clinton campaign (or even the media independent of the campaign) say that Trump said he would deport American citizens?

To me fearmongering involves misrepresntation in some way, either by misstating what the other person is saying (like Trump did with Clinton's stance on guns and, well everything) or over/understating the significance of something.

i don't know when it was said or how that feeling came to be but some minorities who are american citizens are really scared.

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

that's true but how does it change. The little people have to chip away.
The good rich people have to help (and not just by throwing money at it)

Step 1 - The little people need to realize why they're being conditioned to think this way and who's profiting from their racism, sexism, homophobia, and general ignorance.

I haven't thought of Step 2 yet, because Step 1 isn't gonna happen.

[PepsiFree]

IDs to solve race relations and poverty.

That's not a bandaid, it's tearing off a piece of toilet paper.

[photon]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

i don't know when it was said or how that feeling came to be but some minorities who are american citizens are really scared.

That isn't fearmongering, that's actual fear (justified or not).

I think the fear is reasonable. To what degree is hard to say because we only have Trump's words and actions as a public figure to go on, he has no track record of behaviour of when he's required to be responsible for more than just his own self interest.

If I was LBGT I'd be fearful. I'd have had a good chance of having grown up in a environment of constant torture, I'd be afraid that those people become more emboldened again as the leaders don't stand up against that kind of thing. The vice president advocates turning me straight via a form of torture. It's likely the supreme court will stop making same sex marriage legal everywhere and that they'll allow laws that allow businesses to discriminate against me and my partner.

If I was a woman I'd be fearful. I'd be afraid that reproductive rights are going to be set back 30 years. I'd be afraid that my access to health care will be arbitrarily diminished by the religious views of the owners of my health care providers. I'd be afraid that I can't come forward after being sexually abused because the example from the top leader shows I'll be abused further by the system and the public.

If I was Muslim I'd be fearful because the rhetoric of the election campaign has coincided with a drastic increase in violence against those of my faith. Because Trump rallies were a safe space for people who thought I didn't belong to share their hatred, wear their shirt, and speak their hate without recrimination.

If I was Latino I'd be fearful for much the same reasons.

There's a lot to potentially be afraid of. Change is scary even without the rest of it. Every time there's a change in president the same kinds of fears come forward. A leader is supposed to allay those fears.

The problem here is that while John McCain repudiated the lady who was scared of Obama because she thought he was a secret Muslim, Trump instead lets that kind of thing run free because it helps him.

[CliffFletcher]

Some Canadian pundits on the CBC were parsing over Trump's campaign comments and promises, trying to divine their consequences, and they were getting exasperated with how inconsistent they were. It occurred to me that Trump actually talks like a fairly typical loudmouth. He says something outrageous one day, a couple weeks later he says the opposite, and there doesn't seem to be any coherence or consistency. That's unusual for a politician, but I think we all know people like that in real life. They say whatever comes into their head, the more inflammatory the better.

Originally Posted by Dogbert

Race issues aren't intended to be fixed. They're there for a reason - to keep the little people fighting amongst themselves so the people on Donald Trump's level can make off with all the money unnoticed.

The resent upsurge in identity politics originated with the academic left in American universities. So if it's all some conspiracy of the ultra-wealthy, then it's a deep conspiracy indeed.

[MRCboicgy]

This is how these folks are emboldened these days:
https://twitter.com/kumailn/status/797470238614831104

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't know if that's as much a hate crime as idiot in the bar crime. I don't think #### is a racial term anyways, it points to a middle of the road conservative or a Bush conservate who's submission.

[MRCboicgy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't know if that's as much a hate crime as idiot in the bar crime. I don't think #### is a racial term anyways, it points to a middle of the road conservative or a Bush conservate who's submission.

That was last year, now it's being used widely as anti-Semitic slur and by white supremacists in general

[Snuffleupagus]

Kind of disturbing watching young american latino kids beating a Trump piñata with a stick.

And congratulations on fueling the fire.

[kerriffic]

Anti Trump rally in LA today. Quite the crowd.

[DiracSpike]

Seems to me it's more racist to think that getting an ID is just some unachievable, monumental task for black people. It's insulting.

[photon]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Seems to me it's more racist to think that getting an ID is just some unachievable, monumental task for black people. It's insulting.

I don't think anyone thinks that.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Seems to me it's more racist to think that getting an ID is just some unachievable, monumental task for black people. It's insulting.

Regardless of race, it's disgraceful that voting rules, boundaries, distribution of machines, etc. are manipulated for political gain.